AAP 2026 CONFERENCE

Enactivism has recently faced criticism for either leaning too heavily on philosophical speculation without clear scientific grounding, or relying on some dated empirical work in cognitive science, especially concerning sensorimotor actions. This paper uses metabolic and microbiome research as a case study to help illuminate both the problem and a path forward. Although “autopoietic” enactivism has fruitfully drawn on research in evolutionary developmental biology, niche construction theory, and on phenotypic plasticity, it has yet to fully integrate insights from microbiome research. We argue, first, that a closer look at metabolism and the physiological roles microbiota play  in hosts challenge some of the core autopoietic concepts, including self-production, autonomy, and operational closure. It also introduces heteronomy and symbiosis into cognitive, developmental, and evolutionary processes, and suggests a rethinking of enactivism’s traditional avoidance of mechanistic or reductionist explanations. We also argue there is an epistemic need for a philosophy of science that clarifies how to integrate more mechanistic and reductive biological programs with holistic enactivist frameworks, and how to reconceptualize the relationship between organisms, their micro-physical parts, and their environmental context. Ultimately, due to these challenges, we contend that enactivism needs to moderate its commitments to autopoietic theory.